DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 19 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: Although applicant defined BSR in claim 1, it is suggested to define BSR i.e., buffer status report in other independent claims too. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 19, 22, 24-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without “significantly more”. Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 19, 22, 24-34 is/are directed to Abstract Idea such as an idea standing alone such as an instantiated concept, pan or scheme, as well as a mental process (thinking) that “can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper for example using measurement received from a mobile device, transmitting from the source relay node to a donor access node.
The apparatus and the method claim 1, 19 and 22 recites limitation, “determining, by the relay, whether a preset condition is satisfied according to a data volume of a certain service, based on that the relay determines that a bearer for the certain service is a split bearer; and determining, by the relay, a BSR triggering strategy for a protocol stack in the DC state according to whether the preset condition is satisfied”. Since the claim is directed to a process and a machine, which is one of the statutory categories of the invention (Step 1: YES).
The claim is then analyzed to determine whether it is directed to any judicial exception. The claim recites determining, by the relay, whether a preset condition is satisfied according to a data volume of a certain service; and then determining, by the relay, a BSR triggering strategy for a protocol stack in the DC state according to whether the preset condition is satisfied. The determining step recited in the claim is no more than an abstract idea i.e., mental process of estimating, etc. without reciting details of how a solution to a problem is accomplished. (Step 2A: Prong One Abstract Idea=Yes).
The claim is then analyzed if it requires an additional elements or a combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception – i.e., limitation that are indicative of integration into a practical application: improving to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field. In the current claims, there is no additional elements that would integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (Step 2A: Prong Two Abstract Idea=Yes).
Next the claim as a whole is analyzed to determine if there are additional limitation recited in the claim such that the claim amount to significantly more than an abstract idea. The claim requires the additional limitation of a computer with the central processing unit, memory, a printer, an input and output terminal and a program. These generic computer components are claimed to perform the basic functions of storing, retrieving and processing data through the program that enables. In the current scenario, there are no additional elements that would amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself (Step 2B: No). Accordingly, the claim is not patent eligible.
Further, dependent claims do not add any positive limitation or step that recite within the scope of the claim and does not carry patentable weight they are also rejected for the same reasons as independent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 9, 19, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Virtaj et al. Pub. No. US 20160295442 A1.
Regarding Claim 1, Virtej teaches a method for triggering a buffer status report (BSR) by a relay, the relay being in a dual connectivity (DC) state (Para 38, a network configuration or indication providing a cell location to which the UE, operating in a dual connectivity mode i.e., DC state, should transmit a buffer status report (BSR) for split bearers), and the method comprising:
determining, by the relay, whether a preset condition is satisfied (Para 67 and 75, UE may be configured with a threshold for buffered UL data. The threshold may be per bearer or Logical Channel Group (LCG) such that when amount of data is below the threshold, UE may send BSR just to a single eNB (e.g. SeNB) i.e., determining by the relay. In some embodiments, UE may also send BSR to the other eNB only when exceeding the threshold refer to as preset condition is satified) according to a data volume of a certain service (Para 67, amount of data), based on that the relay determines that a bearer for the certain service is a split bearer (Fig. 3b and Para 60, with dual connectivity with split bearer i.e., bearer for the certain service is a split bearer); and
determining, by the relay, a BSR triggering strategy for a protocol stack in the DC state according to whether the preset condition is satisfied (Para 81, if the UE is configured to send the BSR in both eNBs in alternating manner, then if UE does not get the UL grant (after sending SR), UE shall try the other cell i.e., triggering strategy for a protocol stack in the DC state) according to whether the preset condition is satisfied (Para 68, the NW configures UE to send BSR to both a first eNB and a second eNB (e.g., MeNB and SeNB), data until a certain threshold may be reported to i.e., according to whether the preset condition is satisfied).
Regarding Claim 9, Virtaj teaches wherein the protocol stack is a preset protocol stack or a protocol stack determined by a network device (Para 65)..
Regarding Claim 19, it has been rejected for the same reasons as claim 1 and further teaches an electronic device (Fig. 6 and Para 103, UE or eNB), comprising a processor (Fig. 6 Unit 22, processor), a memory configured to store one or more programs (Para 106 and Fig. 6 Unit 24, memory), and a communication interface (Fig. 6 Unit 26 and Para 103, communication interface).
Regarding Claim 22, it has been rejected for the same reasons as claim 1 and further teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing computer programs which, when run on a user equipment (UE) (fig. 6 and Para 103).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2, 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Virtaj et al. Pub. No. US 20160295442 A1 in view of WO2020164591A1.
Regarding Claim 2, Virtaj teaches UE may be configured with a threshold for buffered UL data. The threshold may be per bearer or Logical Channel Group (LCG) such that when amount of data is below the threshold, UE may send BSR just to a single eNB (e.g. SeNB). In some embodiments, UE may also send BSR to the other eNB only when exceeding the threshold which can be refer to as preset condition but does not specifically disclose that the preset condition is that a predicted data volume of the certain service from a child node is greater than or equal to a first threshold.
However, in the same field of endeavor, WO2020164591A1 teaches from step 1 that if the data volume reported by the Pre-BSR triggered by the IAB node is greater than or equal to ul-DataVolumeThreshold, the Pre-BSR can be sent to both the MN and the SN i.e., a predicted data volume of the certain service from a child node is greater than or equal to a first threshold (Para 182).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to combine the method of Virtaj with the method of WO2020164591A1 so as to reduce the uplink scheduling delay of the IAB node and improve communication efficiency and user experience (See WO2020164591A1 Para 29).
Regarding Claim 28, it has been rejected for the same reasons as claim 2.
Claim(s) 3, 5-6, 8, 24-27, 29-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Virtaj et al. Pub. No. US 20160295442 A1 in view of Lee et al. Pub. No. US 20190069308 A1
Regarding Claim 3, Virtaj does not specifically disclose further comprising: obtaining, by the relay, a sum of an existing data volume of the certain service and a predicted data volume of the certain service from a child node; and wherein the preset condition is that the sum is greater than or equal to a second threshold.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches that the PDCP entity indicates PDCP data volume to a MAC entity when there is change in PDCP data volume (or every TTI) i.e., existing data volume of the certain service and the predicted data volume of the certain service (Para 74). Lee further teaches that for UL split bearers in Rel-12 of 3GPP, the PDCP entity indicates the PDCP data volume to only one MAC entity depending on the configuration (ul-DataSplitDRB-ViaSCG). For the other MAC entity, the PDCP entity does not indicate PDCP data volume at all. If the total amount of PDCP data volume is equal to or larger than ul-DataSplitThreshold, the PDCP entity indicate the PDCP data volume to both the MAC entity configured for SCG and the MAC entity configured for MCG i.e., the preset condition is that the sum is greater than or equal to a second threshold (Para 75).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to combine the method of Virtaj with the method of Lee so when the PDCP entity generates data and receives data that becomes available for transmission in the PDCP entity (See Lee Para 103).
Regarding Claim 5, Virtaj does not specifically teach wherein determining the BSR triggering strategy for the protocol stack in the DC state according to whether the preset condition is satisfied comprises at least one of:
transmitting a data-volume indication of a second protocol layer of the relay from the second protocol layer, to a third secondary protocol layer of the relay, based on the preset condition being satisfied; or
transmitting the data-volume indication of the second protocol layer from the second protocol layer, to a secondary protocol stack of the relay, based on the preset condition being satisfied,
wherein the secondary protocol stack is a protocol stack associated with a secondary base station, and the third secondary protocol layer is a third protocol layer associated with the secondary base station.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches from Fig. 8 that the PDCP entity indicates PDCP data volume to a MAC entity when there is change in PDCP data volume (or every TTI). Based on the change in PDCP data volume, the MAC entity may trigger BSR if triggering condition is met, e.g. if PDCP data volume is changed from 0 to finite value i.e., determining the BSR triggering strategy for the protocol stack in the DC state according to whether the preset condition is satisfied and transmitting the data-volume indication of the second protocol layer from the second protocol layer, to a secondary protocol stack of the relay, based on the preset condition being satisfied (Para 74-79). Further, if the first data volume is larger than TH1, the PDCP entity use all paths for submitting the first PDCP data. So, the UE indicates the PDCP data volume to both the MAC entity associated with the primary RLC entity and the MAC entity associated with the secondary RLC entity when indicating the PDCP data volume to a MAC entity for BSR triggering and Buffer Size calculation, and the UE submits the first PDCP data to either the primary RLC entity or the secondary RLC entity i.e., wherein the secondary protocol stack is a protocol stack associated with a secondary base station, and the third secondary protocol layer is a third protocol layer associated with the secondary base station (Para 98).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to combine the method of Virtaj with the method of Lee so when the PDCP entity generates data and receives data that becomes available for transmission in the PDCP entity (See Lee Para 103).
Regarding Claim 6, Virtaj does not specifically teach wherein determining the BSR triggering strategy for the protocol stack in the DC state according to whether the preset condition is satisfied further comprises at least one of
triggering a pre-emptive BSR by a first secondary protocol layer of the relay, based on that the third secondary protocol layer receives the data-volume indication; or
triggering the pre-emptive BSR by the first secondary protocol layer of the relay, based on that the secondary protocol stack receives the data-volume indication.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches If the first data volume is less than TH1, the PDCP entity use a path for submitting the first PDCP data. So, the UE indicates the PDCP data volume to a MAC entity associated with the primary RLC entity when indicating the PDCP data volume to a MAC entity for BSR triggering and Buffer Size calculation, and the UE submits the first PDCP data to the primary RLC entity and if the first data volume is larger than TH1, the PDCP entity use all paths for submitting the first PDCP data. So, the UE indicates the PDCP data volume to both the MAC entity associated with the primary RLC entity and the MAC entity associated with the secondary RLC entity when indicating the PDCP data volume to a MAC entity for BSR triggering and Buffer Size calculation, and the UE submits the first PDCP data to either the primary RLC entity or the secondary RLC entity (Para 97 and 98).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to combine the method of Virtaj with the method of Lee so when the PDCP entity generates data and receives data that becomes available for transmission in the PDCP entity (See Lee Para 103).
Regarding Claim 8, Virtaj wherein the third protocol layer is a radio link control (RLC) layer, and the second protocol layer is a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) layer or a backhaul adaptation protocol (BAP) layer (Fig. 3B).
Regarding Claim 24, Virtaj does not specifically teach wherein determining the BSR triggering strategy for the protocol stack in the DC state according to whether the preset condition is satisfied comprises at least one of: triggering a pre-emptive BSR in a first primary protocol layer of the relay and/or a first secondary protocol layer of the relay, based on the preset condition being satisfied; or triggering the pre-emptive BSR in only the first primary protocol layer, based on the preset condition being not satisfied; wherein the first primary protocol layer is a first protocol layer associated with a primary base station, and the first secondary protocol layer is a first protocol layer associated with a secondary base station.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches If the first data volume is less than TH1, the PDCP entity use a path for submitting the first PDCP data. So, the UE indicates the PDCP data volume to a MAC entity associated with the primary RLC entity when indicating the PDCP data volume to a MAC entity for BSR triggering and Buffer Size calculation, and the UE submits the first PDCP data to the primary RLC entity and if the first data volume is larger than TH1, the PDCP entity use all paths for submitting the first PDCP data. So, the UE indicates the PDCP data volume to both the MAC entity associated with the primary RLC entity and the MAC entity associated with the secondary RLC entity when indicating the PDCP data volume to a MAC entity for BSR triggering and Buffer Size calculation, and the UE submits the first PDCP data to either the primary RLC entity or the secondary RLC entity (Para 97 and 98).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to combine the method of Virtaj with the method of Lee so when the PDCP entity generates data and receives data that becomes available for transmission in the PDCP entity (See Lee Para 103).
Regarding Claim 25, Virtaj does not specifically teach wherein determining the BSR triggering strategy for the protocol stack in the DC state according to whether the preset condition is satisfied comprises at least one of: transmitting a data-volume indication of a second protocol layer of the relay from the second protocol layer to a third primary protocol layer of the relay and a third secondary protocol layer of the relay, based on the preset condition being satisfied; transmitting the data-volume indication of the second protocol layer from the second protocol layer to a primary protocol stack of the relay and a secondary protocol stack of the relay, based on the preset condition being satisfied; transmitting the data-volume indication of the second protocol layer from the second protocol layer to the third primary protocol layer, based on the preset condition being not satisfied; or transmitting a data-volume indication of a second protocol layer from the second protocol layer to the primary protocol stack, based on the preset condition being not satisfied; wherein the third primary protocol layer is a third protocol layer associated with a primary base station, the primary protocol stack is a protocol stack associated with the primary base station, the secondary protocol stack is a protocol stack associated with a secondary base station, and the third secondary protocol layer is a third protocol layer associated with the secondary base station.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches from Fig. 8 that the PDCP entity indicates PDCP data volume to a MAC entity when there is change in PDCP data volume (or every TTI). Based on the change in PDCP data volume, the MAC entity may trigger BSR if triggering condition is met, e.g. if PDCP data volume is changed from 0 to finite value (Para 74-79). Further, if the first data volume is larger than TH1, the PDCP entity use all paths for submitting the first PDCP data. So, the UE indicates the PDCP data volume to both the MAC entity associated with the primary RLC entity and the MAC entity associated with the secondary RLC entity when indicating the PDCP data volume to a MAC entity for BSR triggering and Buffer Size calculation, and the UE submits the first PDCP data to either the primary RLC entity or the secondary RLC entity (Para 98).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to combine the method of Virtaj with the method of Lee so when the PDCP entity generates data and receives data that becomes available for transmission in the PDCP entity (See Lee Para 103).
Regarding Claim 26, Virtaj teaches wherein determining the BSR triggering strategy for the protocol stack in the DC state according to whether the preset condition is satisfied further comprises at least one of: triggering the BSR by a first primary protocol layer of the relay, based on that the third primary protocol layer receives the data-volume indication; triggering the BSR by a first secondary protocol layer of the relay, based on that the third secondary protocol layer receives the data-volume indication; triggering the BSR by the first primary protocol layer, based on that the primary protocol stack receives the data-volume indication; or triggering the BSR by the first secondary protocol layer, based on that the secondary protocol stack receives the data-volume indication (Para 63).
Regarding Claim 27, Virtaj teaches wherein the first protocol layer is a medium access control (MAC) layer (Fig. 3B MAC).
Regarding Claim 29, Virtaj does not specifically teach wherein in terms of determining the BSR triggering strategy for the protocol stack in the DC state according to whether the preset condition is satisfied, the one or more programs comprise instructions configured to perform at least one of: triggering a pre-emptive BSR in a first primary protocol layer of the relay and/or a first secondary protocol layer of the relay, based on the preset condition being satisfied; or triggering the pre-emptive BSR in only the first primary protocol layer, based on the preset condition being not satisfied; wherein the first primary protocol layer is a first protocol layer associated with a primary base station, and the first secondary protocol layer is a first protocol layer associated with a secondary base station.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches If the first data volume is less than TH1, the PDCP entity use a path for submitting the first PDCP data. So, the UE indicates the PDCP data volume to a MAC entity associated with the primary RLC entity when indicating the PDCP data volume to a MAC entity for BSR triggering and Buffer Size calculation, and the UE submits the first PDCP data to the primary RLC entity and if the first data volume is larger than TH1, the PDCP entity use all paths for submitting the first PDCP data. So, the UE indicates the PDCP data volume to both the MAC entity associated with the primary RLC entity and the MAC entity associated with the secondary RLC entity when indicating the PDCP data volume to a MAC entity for BSR triggering and Buffer Size calculation, and the UE submits the first PDCP data to either the primary RLC entity or the secondary RLC entity (Para 97 and 98).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to combine the method of Virtaj with the method of Lee so when the PDCP entity generates data and receives data that becomes available for transmission in the PDCP entity (See Lee Para 103).
Regarding Claim 30, it has been rejected for the same reasons as claim 3.
Regarding Claim 31, it has been rejected for the same reasons as claim 5.
Regarding Claim 32, it has been rejected for the same reasons as claim 6.
Regarding Claim 33, it has been rejected for the same reasons as claim 25.
Regarding Claim 34, it has been rejected for the same reasons as claim 6.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kundu et al. Pub. No. US 20220086824 A1 - RESOURCE ALLOCATION FOR PHYSICAL UPLINK CONTROL CHANNEL DURING INITIAL ACCESS IN NR-UNLICENSED
Wei et al. Pub. No. US 20210352523 A1 - METHODS, WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS AND INFRASTRUCTURE EQUIPMENT
Hwang et al. Pub. No. US 20200053825 A1 - METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR TRANSMITTING AND RECEIVING DATA IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
EP 3820242 B1 - RELAY DEVICE
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIZAR N SIVJI whose telephone number is (571)270-7462. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-4.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alison Slater can be reached at (571) 270-0375. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
NIZAR N. SIVJI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2647
/NIZAR N SIVJI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647